International Development: EC Collaboration

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans the Government have for future collaboration with the European Community in the area of external development assistance.

Baroness Amos: A new Department for International Development Institutional Strategy Paper for the European Community, prepared in consultation with the European Commission, other member states and civil society, has been approved. The paper sets out a number of objectives for the department's work with the EC over the next three to four years. These focus on four key impact areas: EC external assistance programmes which contribute effectively to the achievement of the International Development Targets; trade and other EC policies that help developing countries benefit from the global economy; integration of environmental issues for sustainable poverty reduction; and effective EC responses to crises, conflict and humanitarian disasters.
	A copy will be placed in the Library of the House.

European Community: French and Italian Contributions

Lord Shore of Stepney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 23 April (WA 184) on the subject of the European Community's own resources, what was the source of the estimates concerning the net contribution of France and Italy in 2006 quoted in that reply; and what are the main factors that have contributed to the notable change in the relative net contributions of the United Kingdom, France and Italy in 2006.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Estimates for the net position of France and Italy in 2006 are based on the Financial Perspective ceilings and the new system of Own Resources agreed at the Berlin European Council in March 1999, assuming an enlargement of six new member states, and reflect the impact of the UK abatement and the method by which it will be funded by other member states under the new system agreed at Berlin.

ONS Surveys: Cost

Lord Lipsey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the cost of general surveys of the population other than a census carried out by the Office for National Statistics.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
	Letter to Lord Lipsey from the National Statistician and Registrar General for England and Wales, Office for National Statistics, Mr Len Cook, dated 3 May 2001.
	As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your recent Question on the cost of general surveys of the population other than a census carried out by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) (HL1820).
	The cost of ongoing general surveys of households or individuals commissioned by the ONS and other government departments is approximately £28.5 million per year. This does not include the many other ad hoc surveys commissioned by government.

General Household Survey

Lord Lipsey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	(a) what are the main subjects covered by the General Household Survey; (b) what is its cost; and (c) what are the major deletions, from the General Household Survey over the past ten years.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
	Letter to Lord Lipsey from the National Statistician and Registrar General for England and Wales, Office for National Statistics, Mr Len Cook, dated 3 May 2001.
	As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent Question on the cost of and the main subjects covered by the General Household Survey, as well as its main additions and major deletions (HL1821).
	The cost of the General Household Survey this year is £1.43 million. This includes analysis and reporting for 2000-01, fieldwork for 2001-02 and planning and preparation for 2002-03.
	Since 1971, the General Household Survey has included questions on population and fertility, family and household information, housing, health, employment and education. Since 2000, smoking and drinking have also been included every year.
	Apart from the aforementioned subjects, which are included on a continuous basis, other topics that have been covered periodically include informal carers, elderly people, childcare, contraception, sports participation, burglary and social capital. Prior to 2000, smoking and drinking were covered every two years.

North-east England: Barnett Formula

Baroness Gardner of Parkes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether under the Barnett formula the north-east of England receives £1.123 billion (23 per cent) less government funding than Scotland; and if so, whether they will change the basis of allocation to a needs-based formula.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Barnett formula is used to determine spending allocations for the devolved administrations. It is not used to determine spending allocations within England. There are no current plans to change the formula. Information on identifiable total managed expenditure by country and region is published in Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses.

Census

Lord Lipsey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What information is available from the census which is not available from other sources; and
	What cross-checks are carried out to identify the accuracy or otherwise of the census; and
	What trials of the census questionnaire were carried out prior to its general use; and
	What would be the approximate cost of a sample census based on a sample of 1:10,000 carried out (a) a random survey by telephone and (b) household questionnaire; and
	What are the advantages and disadvantages of a full census as compared with a sample survey of the population; and
	What plans they have to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the 2001 census after its completion.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
	Letter to Lord Lipsey from the National Statistician and Registrar General for England and Wales, Office for National Statistics, Mr Len Cook, dated 3 May 2001.
	As National Statistician and Registrar General for England and Wales I have been asked to reply to your recent Questions asking:
	(1) what information is available from the census which is not available from other sources; (HL1845)
	(2) what cross-checks are carried out to identify the accuracy or otherwise of the census; (HL1846)
	(3) what trials of the census questionnaire were carried out prior to its general issue; (HL1847)
	(4) what would be the approximate cost of a sample survey or 1:10,000 carried out by (a) a random telephone and (b) a household questionnaire; (HL1848)
	(5) what are the advantages and disadvantages of a full census compared with a sample survey of the population; (HL1849 and
	(6) what plans are there to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the 2001 Census after its completion (HL1850).
	I will answer these in order. Availability of data
	Detailed information on some topics, including relationships, ethnicity, religion, knowledge of Welsh, general health, carers occupation and travel to work is not available from other sources.
	On other topics, while it may be the case that some individual particulars of personal information that are collected in the Census may be available from a number of disparate administrative sources, the value of the Census lies in the fact that only in the Census are the many different particulars recorded in combination with each other in order to measure inter-relationships between variables. Furthermore the Census is the only source of data which can provide such statistical information on a uniform basis about the country as a whole and about individual small areas and sub-groups of the population at a common reference point in time.
	It is the Census information on basic demographic characteristics that provides the benchmark for population estimates, social surveys and many public and private information sources about government. Thus the Census remains a unique source of information for resource allocation and a wide range of other purposes within central and local government, business, academia, communities and elsewhere. Checks
	Field checks are made at the time of the collection of the Census returns to ensure that acceptable forms are returned. Subsequent coverage checks are made to assess the extent and nature of any under-enumeration and to provide information by which the census counts themselves may be improved. In addition, aggregated census counts at particular geographic area levels are compared with other sources of statistical data for evaluation purposes. Trials of census questions
	The questions on the 2001 Census form were subjected to an extensive programme of cognitive research and small- and large-scale public testing. This included two major census tests in 1997 and 1999 in a sample of areas, selected to reflect a cross-section of various population sub groups. The 1999 test served, in fact, as a rehearsal for the Census itself.
	Questions are only included in the Census where a clear need has been identified that cannot be met elsewhere and a successful business case has been made. There must also be clear evidence that they are publicly acceptable and would not adversely effect the response to the Census as a whole, and that such questions would elicit responses which would provide information sufficiently accurate to meet users' requirements. More details of this process can be found in the 2001 Census White Paper (Cm 4253). Cost of alternatives
	I am not readily able to provide cost estimates of a sample census on the bases that you have suggested, nor would any such comparison with the costs of a full census be meaningful since a small sample would not facilitate comparable outputs. It would be the case, however, that even for a household sample of this size, the costs of certain activities, such as consulting with users on data needs, devising and testing questions, designing and implementing processing systems, publicity, and dissemination would not be significantly reduced; and that other costs covering the fieldwork and processing would not be reduced in proporation to the sample size. Additional costs would, indeed, be incurred in, for example, the requirement to design an appropriate sampling frame. Advantages
	The advantages of a full statutory census are that the data collected are comprehensive, authoritative, interrelated, consistent across different areas, and relate to a common timeframe and represent value for money.
	The disadvantages might be perceived to be that it involves a relatively rigid process, that the balance between continuity and relevance is often a difficult one, that it is a very large investment, and that the results may not be immediately available. Post-census evaluation
	There are plans to conduct a post-census evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of the exercise in the light of the need to make recommendations on the viability of alternative means of collecting comparable information in the future, as well as on the form that any future census might take.

Commonwealth Immigrants Bill 1968: Legal Advice

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the legal advice given by the Law Officers of the Crown before the introduction of the Commonwealth Immigrants Bill 1968, as to whether the provisions of the Bill were likely to be compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, is now publicly available; and, if not, why not.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Home Office files relating to the work on the Commonwealth Immigrants Bill are in the public domain and their contents may be inspected by application to the Public Records Office.

HM Prison Standford Hill: Board of Visitors

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What were the terms of reference of the inquiry which the Prisons Ombudsman was asked to conduct on the board of visitors at HM Prison Standford Hill; and what recommendations he made.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My right honourable friend the Minister responsible for prisons and probation asked Stephen Shaw to carry out an urgent investigation into all matters relating to complaints against two members of the board of visitors at Standford Hill prison, which should in particular:
	(a) encompass the relationship between the board of visitors (BV)/governor/area manager;
	(b) look at the circumstances leading to the disciplinary proceedings against two members of the board;
	(c) review the investigation by the board of visitors secretariat, into allegations made against the two members of the board;
	(d) make any recommendations.
	Mr Shaw reported to my right honourable friend on 6 April. His conclusions were that:
	Allegations made against members of the Prison Service could not be sustained;
	Some matters could have been better handled by successive governors and the area manager, but none had acted beyond their powers;
	There were significant flaws in the investigative process undertaken by the BoV secretariat and the proceedings had been protracted. But in other respects, the two members of the board subject to investigation had been treated with scrupulous fairness;
	The board of visitors itself could not escape criticism for its conduct of affairs;
	Both of the members being investigated have a case to answer;
	Responsibility for conducting investigations should be removed from the Secretariat (as was proposed by the Secretariat to Sir Peter Lloyd's working group on BoV; and
	The BoV discipline code needs to be revised.
	Action is being taken on these recommendations.

Prison Boards of Visitors

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will give boards of visitors the task of monitoring and reporting to the chief inspector on the implementation of action plans formulated after inspections at their prisons by the chief inspector.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The role of the boards of visitors has recently been the subject of a very comprehensive review by a working group chaired by the right honourable Sir Peter Lloyd. The working group specifically rejected any suggestion that boards should be incorporated into the office of the chief inspector, but nevertheless I am sure my right honourable friend the Minister responsible for prisons and probation will want to give the noble Lord's proposal careful consideration when he considers how best to take forward the report's recommendations.

Licensing Laws: Wales

Lord Hooson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to amend the Licensing Act 1964 to deal with Wales's seven-day opening policy.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Government propose to bring forward legislation, when parliamentary time permits, which will comprehensively modernise the alcohol and entertainment licensing laws in England and Wales. As foreshadowed in the White Paper Time for Reform (CM 4696), and following consultation with the Welsh Assembly, this legislation will abolish the special arrangments in the Licensing Act 1964 for polls on the sale of alcohol on Sundays in Wales.

HM Chief Inspector of Prisons: Appointment

Lord Dubs: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Who has been appointed as the next HM Chief Inspector of Prisons.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Recruitment for the post of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Prisons has been run under Commissioner for Public Appointments guidelines following advertisements in the national press. The choice of candidates has been guided by an advisory panel including two independent assessors. As announced on 6 April, these were the noble Baroness, Lady Stern, former director of the National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders and now Senior Research Fellow at the International Centre for Prison Studies, and the noble Lord, Lord Laming, former Chief Inspector of the Social Services Inspectorate and author of the report, Modernising the Management of the Prison Service.
	From the candidates selected by the advisory panel, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary has recommended that Her Majesty the Queen should appoint Ms Anne Owers CBE, the director of the non-governmental organisation JUSTICE, as the next Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Prisons. Her Majesty has consented to this appointment.
	We are delighted that Ms Owers has accepted this appointment, which takes effect from 1 August this year. We are confident she will uphold the high standards of integrity, rigour and independence we expect from the inspection of this key public service.

Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986

Lord Dubs: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to review Schedule 1 to the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: We are arranging for possible changes to the schedule to be considered by the Animal Procedures Committee, the statutory body which advises the Secretary of State on the operation of the 1986 Act. Before deciding on the action to be taken we will carefully consider the committee's recommendations.

Assistant Surveillance Commissioners

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What arrangements have been made for the appointment of assistant surveillance commissioners under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: On 1 May 2001, my right honourable friend the Prime Minister appointed three assistant surveillance commissioners, His Honour John Jeremy Fordham, His Honour Colin Francis Kolbert, and Viscount Colville of Culross QC for a period of three years to assist the Chief Surveillance Commissioner in his duties.

Community Punishment

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the removal of graffiti and the clearing up of litter from the streets of London is one of the tasks performed by those sentenced to community service; and, if not, whether they will take steps to make it one.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The removal of graffiti and the clearing of litter and debris from rivers in London are some of the tasks carried out by offenders who are sentenced to community punishment, the new name for community service. Offenders do not clear up litter from the streets of the capital as such work is contracted out and enforced work should not replace work that would normally be done by paid employees.

Prime Minister's Adviser on Crime

Lord Northbrook: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	For what period Lord Birt has served as the Prime Minister's adviser on crime.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Lord Birt was appointed in July 2000. He continues to provide advice on issues as requested by the Prime Minister.

Prime Minister's Adviser on Crime

Lord Northbrook: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What policies have been implemented as a result of advice received from the Prime Minister's adviser on crime, Lord Birt; and
	In what ways the advice of Lord Birt to the Prime Minister as an adviser on crime has improved the Government's long-term strategic grasp of criminality and long-run social trends; and
	Further to the statement by the Prime Minister on 24th July 2000 that the Lord Chancellor would ensure that any new policies on crime proposed by the Prime Minister's adviser on crime, Lord Birt, would be shared with Parliament, whether they will now detail those policies.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The work undertaken by Lord Birt was considered alongside that undertaken by the Home Office, the Lord Chancellor's Department, the Law Officers' Department and Her Majesty's Treasury in preparing the Government's strategy document Criminal Justice: The Way Ahead (Cm 5074), which was published on 28th February 2001.

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bassam of Brighton on 10 April (WA 160), whether any of the secondary legislation emanating from the provisions of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 has been notified to the European Community in accordance with the Technical Regulations Directive 98/34/EC and 98/48/EC.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: No. The Government will do so, where appropriate, before the relevant secondary legislation is laid before Parliament.

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bassam of Brighton on 10 April (WA 160), whether, bearing in mind that the "standstill" period applicable to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 terminated on 22 May 2000, before the House of Lords began its detailed scrutiny and amendment of the Bill, they notified the Bill to the European Community in accordance with the Technical Regulations Directive 98/34/EC and 98/48/EC; and, if not, what consequences this has with respect to the enforceability of the measures in law.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: As I indicated in my previous answer (WA 160), the European Commission was notified of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 upon its publication as a Bill in February 2000. The Government are of the view that amendments made to the Bill were not of a nature to require a further notification.

Communications Data: Police Access

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they respond to the proposal from Roger Gaspar, deputy director general of the National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS), that the police should have access to Internet traffic stored for a number of years for investigation purposes.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The police already have powers, through a judicially-authorised production order for example, to access communications data, including Internet data. A new statutory basis for acquiring communications data will be introduced when the provisions contained in Part I Chapter II of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 are commenced this year.
	With regard to the question of the National Criminal Intelligence Service proposals for retention of communications data, I refer the noble Lord to the reply I gave him on 18 December 2000, Official Report, WA 59.

Data Protection Act 1998: Web-based Retailers

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their assessment of the percentage of United Kingdom web-based retailers that are in breach of the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Information Commissioner is responsible for administering and enforcing the Data Protection Act 1998 and she carries out these duties independently of the Government. I understand that the commissioner is planning to undertake a survey of UK-based websites during the coming year with a view to assessing the level of compliance with the Act's requirements.

Employee Monitoring: Information Commissioner Code of Practice

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of an original intention that it should be published by early spring 2001, what progress is being made in the preparation of the code of conduct on employers' monitoring of e-mails of their staff by the Information Commissioner; and when it is now expected that the code will be made available.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The document in question is a code of practice on the use of personal data in employer/employee relationships. I understand from the commissioner that following the reply I gave the noble Earl on 1 February 2001 (Official Report; WA 78), she wrote to him on 14 February about her plans for publication and related matters and offered a meeting to provide further information if that would be helpful. Given the complexity of the issues involved, she was planning at that stage to publish the code in a number of separate sections, one of which would specifically address employee monitoring, including the monitoring of e-mails. I understand that the commissioner has since taken a firm decision to proceed on this basis and that she hopes to be in a position to complete the process by the end of the year.

Mentoring Organisations: Funding

Baroness Rendell of Babergh: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have for the funding of mentoring organisations.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: In working towards our goal of encouraging and supporting new mentors, I am today pleased to be able to announce the launch of a Mentoring Fund grants programme.
	With up to £5.3 million available over 3 years, the Mentoring Fund will provide grants for mentoring organisations to:
	enhance or extend their current mentoring activity;
	develop schemes in new geographical areas;
	reach new audiences. This will enable more volunteer mentors to be available where they are needed, on the ground in local areas.
	This Government also recognise the need for a national infrastructure to promote, develop and celebrate mentoring and to establish a framework of national quality standards for local mentoring schemes. I am therefore pleased to announce that we will be awarding the National Mentoring Network a grant of £1.05 million over three years to develop the infrastructure of mentoring. I am also pleased to announce that to team up new mentors with mentoring opportunities, we are investing a further £1.4 million into Mentor Points.
	We also want to make it easier for people in community groups to apply for government funds. So we are happy to announce the publication today of a consultation document on funding community groups. This sets out a number of proposals that aim to ensure that in the future government small grants programmes will be more integrated, and that application processes will be simpler and more accessible to local community groups. The document also explains how the Government plan to establish and operate the new Neighbourhood Renewal Community Chests, announced in the National Strategy Action Plan in January 2001. I have today placed a copy of the consultation document in the Library.
	We recognise the independent role of the voluntary and community sector in building strong communities, and the need that organisations and groups, and the individuals involved, have for ''capacity building'' support to help them fulfil that role as effectively as possible. In addition to providing strategic funding to over 60 national infrastructure organisations, the Government have earmarked funds for:
	an integrated database to provide comprehensive and co-ordinated information;
	a major training programme to support charity trustees;
	a media awareness training programme for volunteer bureaux;
	an integrated database of social entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial organisations to facilitate better networking.
	The Government are also announcing today funding totalling £320,000 over three years to the Federation of Community Work Training Groups to develop the infrastructure for Community Development Learning.

Chief Commissioner of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission: Answer to Parliamentary Question

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the Chief Commissioner of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission will answer by letter, of which a copy is to be placed in the Library of the House, the Parliamentary Question which the Lord Falconer of Thoroton said he would answer on 20 November 2000 (WA 60); and
	Whether they consider a delay of several months by the Chief Commissioner of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission in responding by letter to a Parliamentary Question to be acceptable.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Due to an administrative oversight, the Chief Commissioner of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission was not notified in the usual way of this particular Parliamentary Question. I apologise for this. The Chief Commissioner has now been asked to write to the noble Lord, and a copy of his letter will be placed in the Library.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the rationale behind the intervention of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission in the case of Evelyn White on 18 May 2000.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: This is a matter for the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. The Chief Commissioner has been asked to write to the noble Lord. A copy of his letter will be placed in the Library.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What thorough consultation on all the Northern Ireland human rights work the Chief Commissioner was referring to in his letter to the Belfast Telegraph on 21 March.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: This is a matter for the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. The Chief Commissioner has been asked to write to the noble Lord. A copy of his letter will be placed in the Library.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What code of conduct, including time-scales, has been adopted by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission for monitoring contacts, whether by letter or otherwise, covering acknowledgement, processing and follow-up action where appropriate; and whether they will ensure that this code is posted on the commission's website.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: This is a matter for the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. The Chief Commissioner has been asked to write to the noble Lord. A copy of his letter will be placed in the Library.

Employment Tribunals: Legal Aid

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to introduce limited legal aid for cases brought before employment tribunals, as provided for in Scotland by the Advice and Assistance (Assistance by Way of Representation) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2001, to the extent that it is necessary to comply with the United Kingdom's obligations under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: Funding is already available for applicants to obtain legal advice when preparing a case to be brought before an employment tribunal. Funding is not usually available for representation. However, representation may be necessary in certain complex cases before employment tribunals and I have the power to authorise funding in these, under Section 6(8)(b) of the Access to Justice Act, 1999.
	I have no present intention to extend funding for representation to employment tribunals in England and Wales more generally.

Royal Courts of Justice and New Scotland Yard: Security Equipment

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Chairman of Committees on 9 October 2000, which indicated that a company in which Mr Salah Idris is a leading shareholder has installed surveillance equipment at the Royal Courts of Justice and digital playback consoles for New Scotland Yard, whether they are satisfied with security arrangements at those premises; and, if so, in view of the report about Mr Idris in The Sunday Times on 30 July 2000, why.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: I have consulted with my right honourable friend the Home Secretary and we are both satisfied with the security at the locations mentioned.
	The Royal Courts of Justice have four digital recording machines manufactured by IES, the company with which Mr Idris is connected. However the machines were procured and installed by a separate company contracted to maintain the security equipment within the Royal Courts. All personnel employed by this company working on the contract have been vetted and cleared by the security services and the police.
	The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police has confirmed that equipment was loaned by IES to the Metropolitan Police Service for testing and evaluation purposes. The equipment in question has never been deployed operationally as part of the security arrangments for the New Scotland Yard complex nor any other Metropolitan Police Service premises.

Judicial and Queen's Counsel Appointments

Lord Roberts of Conwy: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Chancellor on 23 April (WA 185), whether the First Judicial Appointments Commissioner will have access to papers concerning legal appointments made between 1 May 1997 and the date of appointment of the Commissioner; and whether they will invite him to examine those appointments.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: The new arrangements for the supervision of the judicial and Queen's Counsel appointment procedures by the Commission for Judicial Appointments are prospective, not retrospective. The First Commissioner for Judicial Appointments will only be able to consider complaints arising since 15 March 2001, when he acquired his supervisory function as Commissioner, and he will not be invited to examine appointments made before that date.

Judicial and Queen's Counsel Appointments

Lord Roberts of Conwy: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Chancellor on 23 April (WA 185) whether the First Judicial Appointments Commissioner will have access to papers, meetings and interviews concerning the appointments of magistrates.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: The appointments of lay magistrates are expressly excluded from the remit of the First Commissioner for Judicial Appointments, as the procedures for those appointments are materially different from those for the professional judiciary. The Commissioner's remit does, however, extend to the appointments of District Judges (Magistrates' Courts).

Magistrates from Ethnic Minorities

Lord Elder: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to encourage people from ethnic minority communities to become magistrates.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: Schemes to allow people from the ethnic minority communities to shadow magistrates in order to encourage a wider understanding of their role will be established in June with Operation Black Vote. I have asked my officials to begin work to establish the schemes and to look at ways my local Advisory Committees can make better contacts with particular community groups to encourage applications. Operation Black Vote will begin the task of recruiting people to take part in the shadowing schemes during May. There will initially be seven pilot areas, two in London and one each in Birmingham, Bradford, Bristol, Cardiff and Oldham.

Devolution: Northern Ireland Guidance

Lord Elder: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have offered further guidance to government departments on issues relating to devolution.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: I have today placed copies in the Library of Devolution Guidance Note 8 offering advice to government departments on post-devolution legislation affecting Northern Ireland. This guidance note will also be made available on the Cabinet Office internet site at http://www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/constitution/devolution/guidance/dgn.index.htm

Bishop Shi Enxiang

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations are being made to the Government of the Republic of China about the reported reimprisonment of Bishop Shi Enxiang, following the previous 33 years in gaols and forced labour camps.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: We have raised our concerns about the reported detention of Bishop Shi Enxiang on 27 April with the Embassy of the People's Republic of China, and will continue to follow this case closely.
	We regularly raise concerns about the harassment of Christians in our Human Rights Dialogue with China, the latest round of which was held in Beijing on 12-14 February. We made it clear that such harassment was unacceptable and not in keeping with the provisions of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which China signed in October 1998.

Northern Iraq and the Kurdish People

Lord Ahmed: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they support the democratically elected regional government in Northern Iraq.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The UK respects the territorial integrity of Iraq. We also support autonomy for the Kurds of Northern Iraq, including the establishment of a democratic process leading to free and fair elections.

Northern Iraq and the Kurdish People

Lord Ahmed: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the oil for food programme (UNSC 986) has improved the standard of living of Kurdish people.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: According to UN reports on the implementation of the Oil for Food programme in Northern Iraq, a number of indicators point to an improved standard of living of Kurdish people, including: considerable improvement in the nutritional status of children under five years of age, with a consistent decline in chronic malnutrition rates; infant mortality rates are lower than before sanctions were imposed; an estimated 95 per cent of the population now have access to treated water; improvements in health including significant progress with the implementation of a vaccination programme which is now being used to reach groups such as nomads, internally displaced people and those in remote highland areas.

Northern Iraq and the Kurdish People

Lord Ahmed: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What evidence they have in relation to the ethnic cleansing of Kurdish people in Kirkuk by the regime in Baghdad.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Special Rapporteur on Human Rights for Iraq has received many accounts from opposition groups and refugees and NGOs' reports of the forced relocation of non-Arabs from the Kirkuk area. We and our European colleagues call on the Government of Iraq to end all human rights abuses in Iraq.

Northern Iraq and the Kurdish People

Lord Ahmed: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether providing security to the Kurdish people in Northern Iraq is cheaper than looking after the exodus of refugees.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: It is impossible to compare the financial cost of providing security and looking after refugees. However, there is no doubt that the present situation of relative peace and stability is far better for the people of Northern Iraq than the violence, repression and uncertainty of life under Saddam's rule.

Cyprus

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have asked Turkey to help restart the United Nations talks on Cyprus; and, if so, what response they received.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The British Government continue fully to support the efforts of the United Nations Secretary General to secure a just and lasting settlement in Cyprus. As such, we urge all those involved, including Turkey, to co-operate with him in a positive and flexible manner.

Togo

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they support the recommendations of the International Commission of Inquiry for Togo, reference E/CN.4/2001/134,E/CN.4/sub.2/2001/3, of 22 February; and what action they have taken accordingly at the 57th session of the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The report of the International Commission of Inquiry (COI) paints an ugly picture of human rights abuses in Togo.
	Togo has systematically violated human rights standards. Following the report of the COI, we have strongly supported the UN Commission on Human Rights' decision to request the High Commissioner to establish early contact with the Government of Togo and the Secretaries General of the United Nations and the Organisation of African Unity to consider appropriate ways of supporting ongoing investigations into the events described in the report.
	We do not underestimate the difficulties ahead with the Togolese but we shall continue to monitor the situation and ensure that effective action is taken to address the problem and to provide justice for the victims of serious human rights violations.

Liberia

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What response they believe should be made by the United Nations Security Council to the letter from President Charles Taylor of Liberia to the Secretary-General dated 21 March, listing the action taken to comply with Security Council Resolution 1343 of 7 March; whether, in particular, they will recommend that the Security Council should accept President Taylor's invitation to send a monitoring mission to Liberia; and what measures they are recommending, other than monitoring missions, to establish the degree of Liberia's compliance with Security Council demands.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Government note the Government of Liberia's assertion that it has taken steps to comply with the demands of the UN Security Council in its Resolution 1343 (2001). We consider that it remains essential that the Government of Liberia should comply completely with the key demand of the Security Council in UN Security Council Resolution 1343, namely the demand immediately to cease its support for the RUF in Sierra Leone and other armed groups in the region. We are very concerned at reports of continuing Liberian involvement at official level in continued arms supplies to the RUF. s
	The Panel of Experts established by UN Security Council Resolution 1343 is mandated to collect information on the compliance of the Government of Liberia with the demands of the Security Council and to report to the Security Council by 7 September 2001. The possibility of other sources of monitoring remains under consideration by the UN Security Council.

Turkmenistan: Church Closures

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are discussing with the Government of Turkmenistan the closure of all the churches belonging to the Baptist Union in that country, the confiscation of the contents of the church in Ashgabad (Niyazov district), and the confiscation of the Ashgabad Pentecostal Church in March.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The British Government are very concerned about recent actions taken by the Turkmen authorities against some Christian churches in Turkmenistan, including the closure and confiscation of churches and their contents, and the arrest and alleged beating of some members of these churches. Since December 2000, the UK, together with EU Partners and the US has issued two demarches to the Turkmen Foreign Minister to protest at such actions. We continue to use every opportunity to discuss with the authorities human rights issues, including religious persecution, and to urge them to implement their international human rights obligations.

Turkmenistan: Mr Shageldy Atakov

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are raising with the Government of Turkmenistan the case of Mr Shageldy Atakov, a member of an unregistered Baptist Church, and in particular his release from Seydy labour camp (or prison hospital); and whether he suffered assaults while in custody.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: On 23 February the British Government, with EU Partners and the US issued a demarche to the Turkmen Foreign Minister regarding reports that Mr Shageldy Atakov had been beaten and that he was seriously ill, and called for his release on humanitarian grounds. The Foreign Minister took note and undertook to inform the Turkmen President of our concern. We understand that Mr Atakov has since been transferred to Seydy prison. We continue to use every opportunity to raise our concern about Mr Atakov with the Turkmen Government.

Central Asian Republics: Religious Freedom

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have secured freedom for all religious groups in the Republics of Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan; and, if not, whether they will raise the issue in all appropriate international fora.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Central Asian Republics of Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan have a mixed record on human rights, including those relating to religious freedoms. The British Government regard freedom of religion as a fundamental human right. We take every opportunity to raise with the Central Asian Governments human rights issues, including cases of religious persecution. We frequently work with EU Partners and within the OSCE to raise our concerns and to urge the governments to implement their international human rights obligations.

UN Commission on Human Rights

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will seek to persuade the United Nations to introduce a rule requiring any prospective member of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to demonstrate at least a minimum respect for human rights and further requiring all candidate governments to extend a standing invitation to the commission's various investigators, allowing them to visit their countries whenever they want; and, if not, why not.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: All UN member states are eligible to seek election to the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) for a three-year term. We take our CHR membership very seriously. We expect other governments to do the same. All UN member states have promised to uphold human rights by virtue of their signature of the UN Charter. Unfortunately, we do not believe it would be feasible to persuade UN member states that a further condition for CHR membership should be introduced. It is, however, Her Majesty's Government's policy to encourage all governments to ratify the core UN human rights treaties, implement them and to co-operate with UN mechanisms.
	In my honourable friend John Battle's speech to the CHR in Geneva on 22 March, he reiterated that it is this Government's policy always to agree to requests for visits by Special Rapporteurs and other mechanisms of the CHR. We encourage other governments to do the same.

EU Documents: Public Access

Lord Alli: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there has been any progress on the negotiation on public access to EU documents.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: After a year of difficult negotiations, the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament have all agreed in principle to a draft Regulation on public access to EU documents.
	The United Kingdom's objective for these negotiations were to secure a Regulation which ensures:
	greater openness (i.e. more EU documents being made available to the public);
	proper protection for sensitive material;
	a quick, user-friendly mechanism;
	a consistent approach both by the Institutions and in member states;
	compatibility with the United Kingdom Freedom of Information Act.
	All these objectives have been met and we now have an arrangement which we believe will be a firm step forward in EU openness. The Government welcome this: we have long been an advocate of greater openness in the EU institutions. More accessible documents make for more accountable institutions.

Corus Redundancies: Government Support

Baroness Gale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will make an announcement on the measures they will take to support those individuals and communities affected by the restructuring and redundancies planned by Corus.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Corus has today confirmed its intention to proceed with the job cuts it announced earlier this year. The Government's priority must now be to help the individuals and communities affected. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has therefore announced a package of measures to assist those who face losing their jobs and plans to promote economic regeneration and job creation in the areas affected. A similar announcement is being made in the National Assembly for Wales. In total the two packages amount to around £135 million.
	To help individuals to deal with the immediate financial difficulties created by redundancy, the Government intend to introduce a scheme to provide aid for workers affected by restructuring in the steel industry. The Government intend to apply to the Commission for funding available under Article 56 of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) Treaty. Article 56 provides for social aid to assist workers who have lost their jobs as a result of restructuring in companies which produce products covered by the ECSC Treaty. We intend to provide a lump sum payment of around £2,500 to eligible individuals, of which the United Kingdom Government will contribute half. Those eligible will be workers involved in the production of products covered by the ECSC Treaty. We will also make similar provisions for steelworkers covered by the special framework of the Treaty of Rome for whom Article 56 makes no provision. The scheme will apply from 1 January 2000 and it is anticipated that 12,000 workers in England, Scotland and Wales will benefit from this at a total cost of about £32 million. The ECSC Treaty expires in July 2002 and the scheme will apply to eligible workers up to that date.
	My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment is announcing the extension of the new Job Transition Service to all sites affected by the Corus redundancies. The Government will spend over £5 million in England and Wales to ensure that everyone who is affected by these redundancies has access to an equal level of support in getting a new job.
	The Employment Service has already opened jobshops at Redcar, Scunthorpe and in South Yorkshire. In Wales there are jobshops in Llanwern, Ebbw Vale, Bryngwyn and Shotton. The Employment Service is liaising with Corus to assess whether additional jobshops or other facilities are needed as a result of this announcement.
	The new Job Transition Service (JTS), which is already being piloted in South Yorkshire as a result of last summer's announcements by Corus, will now be extended to all the affected sites across the UK. The service offers a new approach to assisting those affected by redundancy to find new jobs.
	Through the JTS, audits of the local economies will be carried out where major redundancies are taking place, and the Employment Service will work with local employers who are looking for new staff to identify their recruitment needs and analyse their skill requirements. Companies such as Nissan in the North East have already been identified as potentially offering opportunities for Corus workers.
	At the same time, the JTS will provide anybody affected either directly or indirectly by these redundancies with personal advice on careers, financial matters, and general skills development. More specifically, it will direct people to suitable vacancies, identify the skills they need to develop, and discuss their training needs. Training will be funded, and--where appropriate--customised programmes will be developed.
	In order to help develop this new service and ensure it is tailored fully to the needs of individuals, the DfEE and the Employment Service are working in partnership with the unions and with Corus itself on a similar package of support and training developed by the unions to be provided before workers leave the company. A joint bid to the European Social Fund for £2.5 million for England will be made in the next few weeks, with a similar bid being made in Wales.
	An employment credit for the over-50s going back to work will also be available to the individuals affected.
	The Government are committed to helping the communities affected, and so we are backing projects crucial for economic regeneration, to ensure the long-term prosperity of all these areas.
	In the North East, Dr John Bridge, the chairman of ONE North East, the Regional Development Agency in the area, has been asked to establish a small group drawn from the key regional partners, including the existing Tees Valley Partnership, to build on the work undertaken by the task group established in response to the previous round of Corus job cuts. The group will pave the way for the establishment of an urban regeneration company involving the five local authorities in the Tees Valley, to take this work forward over the longer term.
	My right honourable friend the Deputy Prime Minister is also announcing a package of measures to help regenerate the Tees Valley. This includes a £20 million public sector project in Stockton to develop a Durham University campus and business park and to make environmental improvements; and support for the next stage of Middlehaven, a regeneration project in the Middlesbrough Docks. The Government will also fund feasibility studies into a new Tees crossing and a light rapid transport (LRT) scheme in the Tees Valley and are encouraging local authorities on Teesside to work up plans to improve transport infrastructure in the East Middlesbrough transport corridor. This is in addition to the £5 million scheme to improve access to Teesside airport which was announced on 28 March. Finally, as announced on Monday 30 April, we will be giving the West Central Hartlepool New Deal for Communities scheme £53.79 million over the next 10 years.
	The Government are working with the Tees Valley Partnership, local industries and further education bodies to consider new research and development facilities. In addition, British Trade International has been asked to work with John Bridge to identify potential sites for inward investors. The Department of Trade and Industry will also be providing £500,000 for the establishment of broadband and digital communications networks in the area.
	The redundancies will also affect Scunthorpe and its surrounding area. Following discussions with the local council and the Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber, Scunthorpe will become a Tier 3 area for the purposes of the Enterprise Grant Scheme. To do this, we are redrawing the assisted areas map to make this support available. It will enable grants to be provided to small and medium-sized companies moving into the area or increasing their investment there. We are also increasing the budget available for enterprise grants in the area by £0.5 million. This will act as a major incentive to the establishment and growth of small and medium-sized companies in and around Scunthorpe.
	My right honourable friend is also asking the North Lincolnshire Steel Task Force, which was set up following the previous round of Corus closures, to advise on additional measures which could be taken in the area. These will take forward the actions set out in the Metal Related Industries Impact Study, funded by DTI, and is looking both at Scunthorpe and South Yorkshire. The first report of the study is already with the task force, and we are asking it to identify immediate action points from the report and to assess what more needs to be done as a result of this round of cuts.
	As in Tees Valley, we are announcing up to £500,000 funding to be allocated to RDA to help with the establishment of broadband infrastructure and related education and training in the area. This will encourage the establishment and growth of new companies and the evolution of existing ones.
	The South Yorkshire Jobs Steel Task Force will also extend the programme of regeneration in Sheffield and Rotheram to ensure that the projects recently announced for new inward investment provide employment opportunities for those affected by the steel redundancies. The task force is also developing a longer-term action plan based on a recent impact study on metals related industries in South Yorkshire. This identifed the scope for developing growth in these industries over the next five years.
	This morning in the National Assembly for Wales, a package of measures was also announced. The First Minister made the following statement to the Welsh Assembly:
	"My Presiding Officer, following the final meeting with the steel trade unions earlier this morning, there is now little doubt that Corus is going to press ahead with the job losses announced on 1 February. Since then, the Trade Unions and Corus have been in discussion to see if less drastic restructuring options were possible. The unions put forward constructive alternative proposals for each plant but these have been turned down by the Company.
	We have worked almost on a daily basis with the unions to press the Company to come to its senses and to think long term. I want to take this opportunity to commend the unions on their unstinting efforts to find a solution to this human tragedy. They come out of this with enormous credit.
	Sadly, this whole episode highlights the short term thinking of Corus management and their disregard of the communities that will be devastated by their job cuts and closures.
	Attention must now focus on offering practical support to the individuals and communities involved. Today I am announcing a £66 million programme of action designed to help the individuals and communities most affected.
	In a few moments time details of a regeneration package on a comparable scale for steel workers and their communities in England will be given in the House of Commons by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. The Secretary of State has worked closely with us on this whole issue and will then be briefing Welsh MP's from steel areas as my Ministers and I will be doing. The Parliamentary Under Secretary for Wales will be covering the UK government employment and other packages.
	The top priority must be to help people deal with the immediate financial problems caused by redundancy, The UK Government will therefore introduce a scheme under Article 56 of the European Coal and Steel Community Treaty to provide aid for those workers affected under this round of job cuts and those in previous rounds back to 1 January 2000.
	This is a modern version of the ISERBS scheme with which steel AMs and unions will be familiar from twenty years ago and involves a number of elements including lump sums for each worker of £2,500. This has been a complex negotiation involving the unions and ourselves as well as the Secretary of State for Wales, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and the Chancellor. The estimated figure for that part of the scheme which applies to Wales is £16 million. It is subject to technical approval from Europe and that approval would include refunding of almost half the gross cost.
	Allied to this, we understand that the unions and Corus will be jointly applying for ESF funds to support a training package for workers facing redundancy. The overall cost of this package is likely to be around £5.7 million in Wales and Corus have agreed to make a significant contribution to this.
	£7 million of the £66 million programme for Wales, is for employment and training measures funded by the Assembly. This will pay for extra employment and training provision for workers made redundant by Corus and its contractors plus their families and those in the supply chain.
	Many of those who will lose their jobs have considerable skills and talents which will allow them to find good, new jobs without too much difficulty. Others will need top quality advice and guidance and first class training if they are to move on successfully to new employers.
	We have agreed with the UK Government that the UK-wide Employment Service will increase its job information work in Wales and offer a wide range of services tailored to the requirements of Corus workers. This service will include vigorous marketing to employers and to sectors such as aerospace, electronics and automotive--which are particularly strong in Wales. In areas such as Deeside, special efforts will be made to work closely with major employers such as Airbus to match Corus workers to new job opportunities arising. We have also had approaches from other employers, including those in the gas and construction industries.
	The Employment Service has set up on-site Job Shops at each of the Corus plants affected. Here people can make use of the whole range of employment services. Benefits Agency Staff will also be on hand to offer advice.
	We are also giving an extra £250,000 to Careers Companies so that they can offer specialist support for those who need it.
	£5.75 million additional money is being allocated to ELWa to provide training tailored to the precise requirements of the individuals concerned. This strand of the programme of action will include:
	Immediate access to training in place of the normal qualifying period of 6 months unemployment;
	Help for those who are in a position to train whilst under notice of redundancy;
	Short up-skilling courses linked to the current demand;
	Customised training to help people move from the steel industry to jobs in other sectors;
	Incentives for some employers to recruit Corus workers;
	Training to help with business start-ups; and
	Special help to remove barriers to work such as travelling, the cost of child care and such like.
	We are also looking at how existing programmes such as Modern Apprenticeships and the Modern Skills Diploma for Adults could play their part. We are talking to the Wales TUC and the Steel Trade Unions to see how help could be provided through the Wales Union Learning Fund and other measures. Up to £1 million will be made available for these measures.
	In carrying out its work, the Employment Service will do all it can to balance the needs of those who are already out of work with those of people who are likely to become unemployed in the near future.
	I also welcome the positive response by the Secretary of State for Education and Employment our representations to extend the Heads of the Valleys and Caerphilly Employment Zone to cover Torfaen. This will make additional help available for long term unemployed adults in an area close to the Corus plants affected.
	The regeneration measures in our programme for action have been developed following detailed discussions with the local councils most closely involved and the W.D.A. We will invest £43 million in these measures over a period of years.
	These measures, including the training and development package, will be funded from the Assembly's own resources. The same situation applies across the UK. This is not ideal but today our priority must be the future of the steel workers affected. There will be other opportunities to debate the broader issues that this highlights.
	The programme announced does constitute real, additional resourcing and must not be confused with spending committed to other programmes. The Finance Minister will be looking again at the total package in the budget round later this year, in particular the allocation for 2003-04.
	European Structural Funds will also have a role to play in helping those cast aside by Corus and in the regeneration of their communities. For example, we are helping to create a Credit Union for Blaenau Gwent with support from ERDF money. In doing so, we will not be re-directing funding at the expense of any other part of the Objective 1 area. Similar considerations apply to other Assembly programmes such as Communities First--though some priorities may be re-ordered.
	The first element of the regeneration programme will be a £2 million business support package to help suppliers who will be badly hit by the Corus closures to find alterative customers. This will also be used to help workers who are considering setting up their own businesses.
	The WDA will also be making a special effort to highlight the inward investment opportunities presented by the early availability of a high quality workforce in the areas most affected by the Corus job losses.
	If we take in turn the 3 areas of Wales affected; Deeside in North Wales; the communities taking the brunt of the losses in South West Wales at Gorseinon and Port Talbot; and finally that part of South East Wales most affected by the rundown of the plants at Ebbw Vale and Llanwern--Gwent more or less:
	First the position at Deeside where job losses at Shotton will be a bitter blow to the area. Fortunately, owing to the buoyancy of the local economy, Corus workers will find a wide range of alternative job opportunities open to them compared to their colleagues in the other parts of Wales, with Ebbw Vale at the other end of the scale.
	The focus on Deeside will be on training and employment and business support. It makes sense to concentrate on enabling the maximum number of people to take advantage of the 1700 new jobs being created by Airbus at Broughton with the financial backing of £19.5 million from the Assembly. Those 1,700 jobs are already understood to be supplemented by a further 200 jobs from the recent UPS order for A300 Airbus planes. Furthermore another 150 civilian aerospace jobs have been announced at DARA Sealand. If more needs to be done, then the case for doing so will be given priority when we review the spending plans for 2002-03 onwards.
	At Gorseinon, the local economy has suffered a double blow with the recent announcement of the closure of the Valeo plant. Also, Port Talbot has had its share of the pain with planned redundancies. We are therefore providing some £4 million extra funding for the WDA's South West Division to tackle the regeneration needs of the area. This is in addition to the higher level of investment already planned by the Agency in projects such as the Baglan Energy Park. There are immediate priorities that we shall discuss with the WDA and the local authority.
	Turning to the major job losses in prospect at Ebbw Vale and Llanwern amounting to 2,300 direct Corus job losses plus 1,000 or so contractors. This area of South East Wales--and Blaenau Gwent in particular--will need significant help. We will therefore invest nearly £32 million of the £50 million available for the programme of action in this area. The lion's share of this is earmarked for tackling the hugh problems created by the complete closure of the Ebbw Vale works.
	We will work with our partners to ensure that we get the very best return from it in terms of new, quality jobs and stronger, more diversified local economies. Improvements to North South transport links between Ebbw Vale and the M4 corridor are bound to figure large in any planning for future. In addition, we need to see what can be done to improve the quality of life in the towns and communities most affected by the job losses.
	It would be a huge mistake to invest simply in a series of unconnected projects. We must get the strategic framework right. I have therefore decided that we should agree the accelerated development of a comprehensive economic, transport and spacial framework for that part of South East Wales most affected by the closures and job losses.
	I want the Assembly to work with its partners to complete this exercise by the late autumn. The framework will need to make clear what improvements are required in the area's economic and transport infrastructure. It will therefore help us to prioritise the projects so as to achieve maximum impact. Later today, the Deputy First Minister will be discussing the details of this exercise with the Executive Group of the All Wales Steel Task Force.
	We will also be consulting on the most appropriate structure to assist with this regeneration. Newport County Borough Council, for example, has suggested the creation of an Urban Regeneration Company. This would not be another quango. It would be a partnership in which the local authority would play a leading role. A URC would be well placed to take advantage of the wide-ranging package of incentives for regeneration announced in the Chancellor's recent budget. However, we will look to see whether other structures could allow us to capitalise on incentives of this kind, in Newport and elsewhere.
	We have asked the Council, together with other agencies, to come back to us as soon as possible on their preferred structure for the redevelopment of the areas most affected by the job losses at Llanwern. Some £200,000 will be made available immediate in start-up costs should there be support for a URC. I do not exclude the possibility of a similar solution in other areas, but the URC does appear particularly appropriate to the circumstances of Newport. £5 million will remain unallocated within the package to allow us to move ahead with priority proposals which emerge from the consultation process.
	As regards the future use of redundant land and buildings, the company has committed itself not only to co-operate on drawing up redevelopment plans but also to meeting its obligations on site remediation and its environmental obligations so as to maximise the potential for land regeneration and therefore the benefit to local communities.
	The Assembly administration is working on the clear principle that the public sector should not pick up the tab for the cost of the site reclamation.
	Potentially, the various Corus sites offer enormous economic opportunities for the areas involved. Unlocking these opportunities will take a huge amount of work, time and resources. Short-term job creation will need to take place off-site--on new or existing sites in the steel closure areas.
	Corus has created the problems we are dealing with today. It must also be part of the solution. I am therefore pleased that the Company will use UK Steel Enterprise, its wholly owned job creation and regeneration subsidiary--the successor to British Steel Enterprise, to assist with the creation of new opportunities for its displaced employees.
	A Team Wales approach is needed in which the private sector is also bound to play a major role. We will therefore project manage the programme in the following way:
	The existing All Wales Steel Task Force--which I and the Deputy First Minister Chair--will provide the policy leadership, drawing on the advice of the partner organisations involved, including local government, the unions, the agencies and--indeed--Corus itself.
	The Deputy First Minister will Chair the Executive Group of the Task Force. This will meet regularly with senior officers from the various organisations involved to manage and co-ordinate the programme across Wales. This Group will meet later today.
	Existing local arrangements will be built on to manage the process locally. We have enough groups and task forces already without adding to them. But the WDA has agreed to appoint Graham Moore--a senior director--to work with the administration and its partners to help manage this process across Wales and ensure we get the best return from the resources announced today.
	Mr Presiding Officer, we have worked tirelessly with the unions and our partners in Wales and in Whitehall to convince the Company that it should scrap the job cuts, or if not scrap them, then at the very least defer, suspend or reduce them. These arguments have fallen on deaf ears. Our earlier commitment to do everything in our power to deal effectively with the consequences of the job losses for the individuals and communities involved now comes into play. This programme demonstrates that we have the will to honour it.
	By working with our partners across Wales I am totally confident that the communities involved will ultimately come out of this in a better position than they are now on the basis of new skills, new jobs and a better quality of life. We will report progress on the programme at regular intervals to the Assembly and the relevant committees.
	In all the areas affected, the Government will work with the regional development agencies, British Trade International, the Small Business Service and local partners to support business start-ups and small firm growth and to attract inward investment.

House-Sitters: Minimum Wage Provisions

Lord Carlile of Berriew: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will review the approach of the Inland Revenue to the status of "housesitters", who look after the homes of absent householders, with a view to excluding their activities from the minimum wage provisions.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Officials from the DTI, which is responsible for minimum wage policy, will be meeting representatives of house-sitting agencies to discuss the way that the minimum wage rules apply to house-sitters employed by them. A case involving house-sitters is due to be heard by an employment tribunal later this month. It would not be appropriate, therefore, for me to comment further.

Probation Officers: Benefit Penalty

Earl Russell: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the speech of Baroness Hollis of Heigham on 2 April (H.L. Deb., cols. 651-2), whether Probation Officers who resign from the service rather than report a breach of a community order whereby their customer might suffer a benefit sanction will be free from the penalties for voluntary unemployment.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: As set out in Home Office National Standards, probation officers are required to determine, in the first instance, whether an offender has failed to comply with the terms of a community sentence without reasonable cause. The national Probation Service expects probation officers to discharge their responsibilities in a professional manner and in accordance with the law.
	If a probation officer resigns rather than implement these measures and then makes a claim to Jobseeker's Allowance, he will be subject to the same rules as everyone else making a claim. Jobseeker's Allowance is intended for people who are out of work for reasons beyond their own control. Entitlement is not automatic. It has always been a principle of unemployment insurance that people who leave their jobs without just cause, or who are dismissed for misconduct or who refuse to take up an offer of employment without good cause, suffer a benefit penalty. There is no intention to alter these provisions to exclude probation officers.

Pensioners Living in EU: Pensions Uprating

Lord Shore of Stepney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many United Kingdom retirement pensioners drawing National Insurance pensions are currently living in the countries of the European Union; and what will be the cost of uprating those retirement pensions in the current financial year.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: There are around 227,000 people with a United Kingdom State Retirement Pension living abroad in the European Union countries. The estimated cost of uprating these retirement pensions in 2001-02 is £30 million.
	Notes:
	1. Source 5 per cent sample from Pension Strategy Computer System at 30 September 2000.
	2. The number of pensioners is rounded to the nearest thousand.
	3. The cost is rounded to the nearest £10 million.
	4. The estimated costs cover all components of retirement pension.

Pensioners Living Abroad: Pensions Uprating

Lord Shore of Stepney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Hollis of Heigham on 9 April (WA 152-153), what is the estimated cost of uprating National Insurance retirement pensions to United Kingdom pensioners now living in Commonwealth countries other than Cyprus, Jamaica, Malta and Mauritius; and what would be the increase in National Insurance contributions paid by United Kingdom citizens in employment in the United Kingdom if the sum necessary to uprate all retirement pensions in the Commonwealth was financed from the National Insurance Fund.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The estimated cost of fully uprating the UK State Retirement pensions of those pensioners currently living in Commonwealth countries, other than those stated, would be about £310 million annually: an estimated increase of 0.1 per cent in 2001-02 if the uprating were to be financed from increased National Insurance contributions.
	Notes:
	1. Cost of uprating based on 5 per cent sample from Pensions Strategy Computer System at 30 September 2000.
	2. Costs are rounded to the nearest £10 million.
	3. Impact on National Insurance Contribution was estimated by the Government Actuary's Department.

Treasury Solicitor's Department Review

Lord Tomlinson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made in the review of the work of the Treasury Solicitor's Department.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: I refer to the review of the Treasury Solicitor's Department that I announced to this House on 8 March, col. WA36.
	I am pleased to announce the publication of the report on the first stage of the review. The report concludes that the Treasury Solicitor's Department has generally provided a high quality service to the Government and should continue to be an agency. Stage 2 of the review will examine how the agency's performance can be enhanced and improved to meet the increasing demands upon its services.

Diabetic Drivers

Lord Harrison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Following the recent changes in the procedures for vetting Class C1 diabetic drivers, whether they intend to introduce any further reform or to undertake any research into the reform of the regulatory system governing diabetic drivers who use motor vehicles for either leisure or business purposes.

Lord Whitty: Further hard evidence on the risks of hypoglycaemia (reduced blood sugar level) to driving is needed before any more changes to the current arrangements can be recommended. To this end, I have initiated a research programme which will help increase our knowledge about diabetes and driving. The results of this extensive exercise will be available in two to three years. The Honorary Medical Advisory Panel on Driving and Diabetes will then review the situation and consider whether any changes can be recommended for large vehicles other than those in category C1.

Rural Consultations: TGWU Participation

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What arrangements they are making to ensure that farm workers and the agricultural section of the Transport and General Workers' Union are involved in the consultations on future policy for the countryside.

Lord Whitty: The National Secretary, Rural Agricultural and Allied Workers of the Transport and General Workers' Union (TGWU) was a member of the Rural White Paper Sounding Board, an informal advisory forum chaired by Ministers which discussed key themes for the Rural White Paper.
	The White Paper committed the Government to establishing a National Rural Sounding Board to provide rural people and organisations with an opportunity to put concerns direct to Ministers and keep Ministers fully informed about the state of the countryside. The Government have consulted a cross-section of rural organisations, people and interests, including the TGWU, about proposals for the board, which we expect to set up in the summer.

London East-West Rail Links

Lord Sheppard of Didgemere: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish the report by the Strategic Rail Authority on east-west rail links across London; and
	Whether they will set up a joint project team, with the Strategic Rail Authority and Transport for London, to take CrossRail forward to seek statutory approval.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: Following additional appraisal work within the High-Level Group (the Minister for Transport, the Mayor and the Chairman, Strategic Rail Authority), which was set up to develop a co-ordinated approach to London rail projects, we have agreed next steps on taking forward the SRA's report. Work will start immediately on project definition and design development of a central, cross-London, rail link, the tunnel section of which could follow the alignment of the CrossRail scheme. The work will look at alternative service patterns and access to Heathrow. This will lead to a recommendation on the option to be taken forward. At the same time, work will start on a feasibility study of a south-west to north-east London rail link, the tunnel section of which could follow the alignment of the Chelsea-Hackney scheme.
	This work will be taken forward jointly by the Strategic Rail Authority and Transport for London, under the guidance of the High-Level Group.
	I am arranging for copies of the Strategic Rail Authority's report to be placed in the Library and published on the SRA website.

CrossRail Project

Lord Sheppard of Didgemere: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they expect construction of CrossRail to begin.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The work on project definition and design development will take about 14 months. This will lead to a recommendation on the option to be taken forward. This is a major project, and it is difficult to predict the time that will be taken to obtain powers. At this early stage it is expected to be at least five years before construction could begin.

East London Line

Lord Sheppard of Didgemere: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	With reference to the allocation of £39 million announced by the Strategic Rail Authority on 2 April, when they expect construction of the extension of the East London Line to begin, and who will be responsible for managing the project and its subsequent maintenance and operation.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: It is intended that the initial work on construction of the northern extension from Whitechapel to Dalston will start at the end of this year. London Underground will manage this work. The Strategic Rail Authority is currently making the arrangements for the main construction phase to follow in 2002.
	The East London Line extension will be constructed to National Rail Standards as the service pattern proposed for the finished project involves substantial running over Railtrack tracks, but no decisions have yet been made regarding the maintenance of the line or the operation of the service.
	The commencement of works on the southern extensions is dependent on the outcome of LUL's application for powers under the Transport and Works Act 1992.

London Underground: PPP Contracts

Lord Sheppard of Didgemere: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will incorporate in Public Private Partnership contracts for London Underground the changes set out in the Deputy Prime Minister's letter of 27 March to Mr Kiley (Commissioner for Transport for London) to accommodate his concerns for unified management control.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: Mr Kiley replied to my right honourable friend the Deputy Prime Minister's letter with a further series of requirements which were wholly incompatible with the key risk transfer and performance management characteristics of the PPP. In his letter of 30 March to the Chairman of London Transport, a copy of which is in the Library of the House, the Deputy Prime Minister explained his view that what was really needed was to avoid any further delay in securing the massive long-term investment that the Underground requires and that the best way to do this was through the PPP. The LT Board are now making every effort to bring matters to as speedy a conclusion as possible, consistent with the permanent requirement to maintain and improve safety on the Underground and to achieve the best deal for London.

London Underground: PPP Contracts

Lord Sheppard of Didgemere: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they expect the Public Private Partnership contracts for London Underground to be signed; what capital investment London Underground has been authorised to carry out in the meantime; and how it will be funded.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: I understand that the Board of London Transport decided on 2 May to appoint preferred bidders in the competitions for each of the two deep tube contracts, and that they expect to appoint a preferred bidder in the competition for the sub-surface lines contract in the summer. They aim to have completed all three competitions by the autumn. London Underground's capital investment in the meantime will continue to be funded by a combination of Government grant and London Transport's own revenues. London Transport has an interim grant settlement for 2001-02 of £104 million. The Government are currently considering what additional resources to make available in respect of London Underground.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Military Exercise Restrictions

Lord Vivian: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What field training and army exercises have been delayed or cancelled in Canada, British Forces Germany and the United Kingdom due to foot and mouth disease.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: All routine training on military training areas and on private land in Great Britain was suspended on 23 February 2001, until further notice, owing to the current outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease. The only activity which has continued on military training areas has been pre-operational tour training to ensure that no soldier has been sent on operations without the appropriate training.
	Since the end of March, we have been able to lift restrictions on some 40 low risk training facilities in Great Britain to allow other high priority training to proceed. In addition, limited dismounted infantry training and artillery firing is about to resume on Salisbury Plain Training Area. Each of the sites that have been opened again has been agreed specifically with the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF). The overall suspension of training is under constant review by the MoD in concert with MAFF and the ban will be relaxed further as the situation across the country allows.
	In Germany, similar restrictions on training were placed on the Bundeswehr, the British Army and all other Armed Forces by the German authorities on 16 March 2001.
	It would not be practical to list all the exercises cancelled since the outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease as all routine training has been suspended. However, the first of this year's exercises at the British Army Training Unit Suffield in Canada, Exercise Medicine Man 1, is among those that have been cancelled.

Unidentified Flying Objects

Lord Hill-Norton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 25 January (WA 22), why the unidentified flying objects documents referred to were classified secret; whether these documents had any caveats attached to them; and what was the reason for any such caveats.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: One document was classified "Secret" with a "UK Eyes Only" caveat because it contained information about the UK air defence ground environment that could be of significant value to hostile or potentially hostile states. Associated correspondence was given the same classification. Generally, however notifications of and correspondence on the subject of "UFO" sightings are unclassified.

Unidentified Flying Objects

Lord Hill-Norton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in line with previous ministerial commitments, they will give an undertaking not to destroy any files containing information on unidentified flying objects.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Public Records Acts of 1958 and 1967 place a responsibility on all government departments to review the records which are generated within the department, to select those which are worthy of permanent preservation and transfer them to the Public Record Office.
	It was generally the case that before 1967 all "UFO" files were destroyed after five years, as there was unsufficient public interest in the subject to merit their permanent retention. However, since 1967, given the general levels of public and occasional academic interest, it has been Ministry of Defence policy to preserve "UFO" report files. There are no plans to change this policy.

Unidentified Flying Objects

Lord Hill-Norton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many unidentified flying object sightings were reported to the Ministry of Defence in 1998, 1999 and 2000.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The numbers of "unidentified flying object" sightings reported to the Ministry of Defence in 1998, 1999 and 2000 were as follows:
	1998: 193
	1999: 229
	2000: 210

Special Educational Needs Code of Practice

Baroness Darcy de Knayth: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the final version of the code of practice on special educational needs will be laid before Parliament for approval.

Baroness Blackstone: The final version of the revised special educational needs code of practice will be laid before Parliament for approval as soon as practicable after the Special Educational Needs and Disability Bill receives Royal Assent.

Universities: EU Funding

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many posts are funded by the European Union in British universities: under which European Union schemes and at what annual cost; and whether the university or the European Union has the final say in who is appointed to those posts.

Baroness Blackstone: 102 Chairs are funded in the UK under the European Commision's Jean Monnet Project: 87 Chairs and 15 Chairs Ad Personam. In 2000-01, the subsidy is a maximum of 10,000 euros per Chair and 4,000 euros per Chair Ad Personam for up to three years. The European Commission has asked for nominations for 2001-02 Ad personam Chairs, but no funding will be available within EU member states. Universities applying for a Chair propose a preferred candidate with details of his or her academic record to the European selection panel. Ad Personam Chairs are awarded to individuals. For details of where these Chairs are located, I refer the noble Lord to the reply I gave on 29 January, Official Report, WA 27-28.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Course

Lord Elder: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made towards eradicating foot and mouth disease.

Baroness Hayman: Copies will be placed in the Libraries of the House today of the latest graphs produced for the Chief Scientific Adviser's group on the course of the disease. These demonstrate that in the seven-day period ending Wednesday 2 May there was an average of approximately eight new confirmed cases each day compared with 16 in the seven-day period ending 22 April and with a weekly average of 43 at the peak in late March. We can therefore be optimistic about the future course of the disease, although the Chief Scientific Adviser has warned that cases will continue to occur for some time yet.
	It is clear that our policy to bear down on the outbreak swiftly and prevent spread of the disease through slaughtering of animals on infected premises within 24 hours of the case being reported, tracing dangerous contacts and tackling the disease on contiguous premises within 48 hours, has been effective. This has been crucial to the control of the epidemic.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Field Operations

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	For how long after livestock suffering from foot and mouth disease have been removed from the land it is advisable to refrain from making hay or growing fodder crops.

Baroness Hayman: Plants and grains do not become contaminated if they grow on land which had previously been grazed by animals affected by the disease. Their surfaces can become contaminated if they have been in physical contact or close proximity with an infected animal.
	General guidance for growers of crops and grass was posted on the MAFF website on 30 March. On foot and mouth infected farms, field operations can be undertaken subject to the advice of the divisional veterinary manager on the basis of a site-specific risk assessment.
	Once restrictions have been lifted field operations will be able to resume as normal without the need for any additional delay subject to cleaning and disinfection procedures.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Species Susceptibility, Incubation and Infectivity

The Duke of Montrose: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the relative susceptibility to, and incubation period and infectivity of, type O foot and mouth disease in--
	(a) cattle;
	(b) sheep;
	(c) pigs;
	(d) alpaca;
	(e) bison;
	(f) red deer;
	(g) roe deer; and
	(h) goats.

Baroness Hayman: All domesticated and wild cloven-hoofed animals may be infected with the virus of foot and mouth disease. The severity of the disease differs with the serotype and strain of virus involved, and the species, sex and age of animal. Some strains are adapted to particular species.
	The clinical disease is typically very severe in cattle and pigs and mild or inapparent in sheep and goats, but exceptions can occur. Wild pigs show a similar type of disease to domestic pigs. Wild deer tend to show mild or inapparent disease, resembling the disease in sheep, although some species (for example, roe deer and muntjak deer in the UK) may be severely affected.
	The age of the animal greatly affects the severity of the disease; young animals, especially lambs and piglets can die because of damage to the heart muscle, and mortality of 54 to 59 per cent has been recorded in some outbreaks. Mortality in adults is usually less than 5 per cent.
	The incubation period for foot and mouth disease depends upon the infective dose. Animals exposed to a high amount of virus typically have an incubation period of 1.5 to 5 days while exposure to a low dose can result in an incubation period of 6 to 14 days.

Foot and Mouth Disease: MAFF's Letters to Farmers

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the recent letter about foot and mouth disease sent by the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to every farmer was undated; on what date the Minister signed it; who drafted the letter; and whether they are aware it contained four grammatical errors.

Baroness Hayman: My right honourable friend (the Minister) has written to farmers about the foot and mouth outbreak on two occasions. The first was despatched by our mailing house during the week beginning 5 March 2001 and the second during the week beginning 9 April 2001. Both letters were prepared by officials and approved by my right honourable Friend (the Minister) in the usual way. If any errors in grammar were made it is, of course, a matter of regret since we always strive to ensure high standards both of grammar and of clarity in ministerial correspondence. No other complaints have been received about the issues raised by the noble Lord. This possibly reflects a general recognition of the many other pressing priorities which have faced the agricultural industry and the ministry during the current foot and mouth disease outbreak.

Future of the Countryside and Farming

The Earl of Caithness: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What consideration they have given to the settng up of a Royal Commission to look into the future of the countryside and farming following the loss of income to the farming community in recent years which has been compounded by the foot and mouth epidemic.

Baroness Hayman: The Government have made it clear that at the conclusion of the foot and mouth outbreak we will need to consider what lessons can be learned. The form that this exercise will take has not yet been decided. Our top priority is to focus on implementing the mechanisms to control and eradicate the disease.

MoD Meat Purchasing Safeguards

The Duke of Montrose: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 24 April (WA 213), what tonnage of the total meat purchased abroad by 3663 as the meat supply contractor for the Ministry of Defence was sourced in the months preceding 20 February 2001 from (a) South Africa (b) Argentina; and
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 24 April (WA 213), what mechanisms 3663 uses to determine whether--(a) meat bought under the label "South African" does not come from Swaziland; (b) meat bought from the Argentine does not come from the provinces recognised as being infected with foot and mouth disease; and (c) meat bought from other non-European Union countries with a foot and mouth outbreak has a sufficiently rigorous system of labelling to show that it does not come from infected areas.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: In the past year 3663 has sourced no meat from either (a) South Africa or (b) Argentina.
	Meat from other non-European Union countries is subjected to export controls by those countries to ensure that only meat from foot and mouth disease free areas is exported. The process is further controlled by the European Union Veterinary Inspectorate to ensure that all meat complies with the relevant import legislation.

National Health Service Number

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will make a study of the possibility of using the National Health Service number as a unique reference for United Kingdom citizens.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: There are no plans for using the National Health Service number as a unique reference for United Kingdom citizens other than for healthcare purposes.

National Health Service Performance Fund

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the whole of the £60 million National Health Service Performance Fund for 2000-01 has been paid to NHS bodies.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The National Health Service Performance Fund for 2000-01 consisted of £60 million, of which £37 million was paid to the NHS bodies which met the criteria at the four payment dates.
	All health authorities will receive their full share of the £60 million recurrently in 2001-02.

National Health Service Performance Fund

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish the objectives agreed with health bodies for the National Health Service Performance Fund for 2000-01, and for each such body the extent to which the objectives were achieved.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Health communities, led by health authorities, were set criteria to meet for each payment of the National Health Service Performance Fund. These criteria were set out to measure performance against three key areas:
	Waiting: performance against agreed health authority profiles for inpatient and outpatient waiting lists and the 18 month inpatient guarantee;
	Financial Position: performance against the planned in year Income & Expenditure (I&E) position for health authorities;
	Winter Planning: quality of winter planning and performance as measured by the latest monitoring, in particular for trolley waits.
	The following table sets out the performance of each health authority at each payment date.
	
		
			 Health Authority Did the Health Authority meet all the criteria? Payment 1 Payment 2 Payment 3 Payment 4 
			 Avon Yes No No No 
			 Barking and  Havering No Yes No Yes 
			 Barnet No No No No 
			 Barnsley No Yes No Yes 
			 Bedfordshire Yes No No No 
			 Berkshire Yes Yes No No 
			 Bexley and  Greenwich No Yes No No 
			 Birmingham Yes Yes No No 
			 Bradford Yes Yes Yes Yes 
			 Brent and Harrow No No No No 
			 Bromley No No Yes Yes 
			 Buckinghamshire Yes No No No 
			 Bury and Rochdale No No No Yes 
			 Calderdale and  Kirklees Yes No No Yes 
			 Cambridgeshire No Yes Yes Yes 
			 Camden and  Islington No No Yes No 
			 Cornwall and Isles  of Scilly No No Yes Yes 
			 County Durham Yes Yes No No 
			 Coventry Yes No No No 
			 Croydon Yes Yes Yes No 
			 Doncaster Yes Yes Yes No 
			 Dorset Yes Yes Yes Yes 
			 Dudley No No No No 
			 Ealing,  Hammersmith and  Hounslow Yes No Yes Yes 
			 East and North  Hertfordshire No Yes No No 
			 East Kent Yes Yes Yes No 
			 East Lancashire Yes No Yes No 
			 East London and  the City Yes No No No 
			 East Riding Yes No No No 
			 East Surrey No No No No 
			 East Sussex,  Brighton and Hove Yes No No No 
			 Enfield and  Haringey Yes Yes No No 
			 Gateshead and  South Tyneside Yes No Yes Yes 
			 Gloucestershire Yes No No Yes 
			 Herefordshire Yes No No No 
			 Hillingdon Yes No No Yes 
			 Isle of Wight Yes No No No 
			 Kensington, Chelsea  and Westminster Yes No Yes Yes 
			 Kingston and  Richmond Yes Yes No Yes 
			 Lambeth,  Southwark and  Lewisham Yes No No No 
			 Leeds No No No No 
			 Leicestershire Yes No Yes Yes 
			 Lincolnshire Yes Yes Yes No 
			 Liverpool Yes Yes Yes Yes 
			 Manchester Yes Yes Yes No 
			 Merton, Sutton and  Wandsworth No No No No 
			 Morecambe Bay Yes No No Yes 
			 Newcastle and  North Tyneside Yes No No No 
			 Norfolk No Yes No No 
			 North and East Devon No Yes No Yes 
			 North and Mid  Hampshire Yes No No No 
			 North Cheshire Yes Yes No Yes 
			 North Cumbria No No No Yes 
			 North Derbyshire Yes Yes No Yes 
			 North Essex Yes No Yes Yes 
			 North  Nottinghamshire Yes No Yes Yes 
			 North Staffordshire No No Yes Yes 
			 North West  Lancashire Yes Yes Yes Yes 
			 North Yorkshire Yes Yes No No 
			 Northamptonshire Yes No No No 
			 Northumberland No No No No 
			 Nottingham Yes Yes Yes Yes 
			 Oxfordshire No No No No 
			 Portsmouth and  South East  Hampshire No No No No 
			 Redbridge and  Waltham Forest No No Yes Yes 
			 Rotherham Yes Yes No Yes 
			 Salford and Trafford No No No Yes 
			 Sandwell Yes No No No 
			 Sefton No No No Yes 
			 Sheffield Yes No Yes Yes 
			 Shropshire Yes No No No 
			 Solihull Yes No No No 
			 Somerset Yes No Yes Yes 
			 South and West  Devon No No Yes Yes 
			 South Cheshire Yes Yes Yes Yes 
			 South Derbyshire Yes Yes Yes Yes 
			 South Essex Yes No No No 
			 South Humber Yes No No Yes 
			 South Lancashire Yes Yes No Yes 
			 South Staffordshire No Yes No Yes 
			 Southampton and  South West  Hampshire Yes No No No 
			 St. Helens and  Knowsley Yes No No Yes 
			 Stockport Yes Yes Yes No 
			 Suffolk Yes No No No 
			 Sunderland Yes No Yes Yes 
			 Tees Yes Yes Yes Yes 
			 Wakefield No No No No 
			 Walsall Yes Yes No No 
			 Warwickshire No Yes Yes No 
			 West Hertfordshire No Yes No No 
			 West Kent No No No No 
			 West Pennine Yes No No No 
			 West Surrey Yes No No No 
			 West Sussex Yes No No No 
			 Wigan and Bolton Yes Yes No Yes 
			 Wiltshire Yes No No Yes 
			 Wirral Yes No No Yes 
			 Wolverhampton No Yes Yes Yes 
			 Worcestershire Yes No Yes No

National Health Service Performance Fund

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish the arrangements that they have made for the National Health Service Performance Fund from 1 April 2001.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Department of Health is preparing to issue guidance on the National Health Service Performance Fund. Details will be published on the department's website.

Indoor Air Pollution: Effects on Health

Lord Lewis of Newnham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What research programmes they currently fund into individual human exposure to air pollution in households in the United Kingdom; and what plans exist for further research.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: In 1997, a joint Department of Health and Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions research programme was commissioned. This programme, The effects on health of exposure to air pollutants and damp in the home, focused on indoor air pollution and its effects on health. Effects on sensitive individuals in the population, interactions between indoor air pollutants and health effects of damp were focused upon. Fourteen new projects were funded, at a total cost of £1.3 million.
	This programme is now beginning to produce results which will be reviewed by the Departments and will be used both to inform policy and to determine requirements for further research where necessary.

Indoor Air Pollution: Effects on Health

Lord Lewis of Newnham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to evaluate, or establish, health-based air quality standards for indoor air pollutants.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, published in January 2000, sets standards for main outdoor air pollutants. It does not, however, set standards for indoor air pollutants. This is not because the quality of indoor air is not important to health. It is because it is impracticable to measure concentrations of pollutants inside peoples' homes on the same scale that has been measured for outdoor pollutants and it would not be easy to regulate levels of indoor pollutants.
	The results of a joint Department of Health and Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions research programme, The effects on health of exposure to air pollutants and damp in the home, that focuses on indoor air pollution and its effects on health, will go some way to identifying key issues and concerns of indoor air pollution. This information will be important in future decisions on setting guidelines for indoor air pollutants.

National Cardiothoracic Transplant Centre

Lord Davies of Coity: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any health Minister will be visiting the Wythenshawe centre in advance of their decision in respect of the site of the fourth national cardiothoracic transplant centre.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: No visit is planned.

National Cardiothoracic Transplant Centre

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What recent ministerial visits there have been to transplant centres or are planned before the site of the fourth national cardiothoracic transplant centre is announced.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: No Ministers have recently visited a cardiothoracic transplant centre and no such ministerial visits are planned.

National Cardiothoracic Transplant Centre

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether health Ministers now know the outcome of the study of the three transplant centres from which the fourth national cardiothoracic transplant centre will be selected; and when they will be announcing the timing of consultation on the study's findings.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Health Ministers do not know the outcome of the study of the three transplant centres. An undertaking has been given that the proposals for the future of the National Cardiothoracic Transplant Service will be set out in a document for public discussion before a final decision on the site of the fourth centre is taken.

Quality Protects Management Action Plans

Lord Fyfe of Fairfield: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the outcome of the evaluation of the Quality Protects Management Action Plans submitted to the Department of Health by local authorities.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: All local authorities with social services responsibilities submitted their Quality Protects Management Action Plans (MAPs) to the Department of Health by the end of January. The Social Services Inspectorate has now completed its evaluation of the MAPs and we have considered their findings. The MAPs from all 150 local councils have reached an acceptable standard. We have written to the chief executives of the authorities to confirm that, subject to normal grant procedures, they will receive payment of their allocation of the children's services grant for 2001-02.
	The evidence nationally shows that Quality Protects is beginning to make a real difference to children's lives. Children who are looked after are experiencing fewer placement moves; more of them are finding new permanent families through adoption; and fewer are leaving care prematurely when they reach 16. We shall be publishing a national overview report on the evaluation of MAPs in the summer.

Hepatitis C: Steering Group

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Haemophilia Society were invited to participate in any stage of the work of the advisory group on hepatitis C chaired by Professor Howard Thomas; and what other voluntary groups were invited to participate.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Hepatitis C Strategy Steering Group has only just begun its work, and is aiming to produce a consultation paper by the end of the calendar year. We are intending to include the Haemophilia Society in the consultation exercise with the National Health Service, professional bodies and the voluntary and community sectors.
	I refer my noble friend to the reply I gave my noble friend Lord Faulkner of Worcester on 26 March at columns WA 4-5 for details of the membership of the steering group.

Electrically Powered Wheelchairs

Baroness Darcy de Knayth: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations they have received from the disability consortium "emPOWER" about the current annual allocation of £14 million funding for the provision in England by the National Health Service of electrically powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs and wheelchair vouchers; and
	When they expect to meet representatives of the disability consortium "emPOWER" to discuss schemes for the provision of electrically powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs and wheelchair vouchers.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Ministers at the Department of Health have corresponded and met with emPOWER to discuss the Government's continued commitment to the provision of indoor/outdoor powered wheelchairs and vouchers, and the recurrent funding of £14 million so that users' needs can be met more effectively. We are also funding the emPOWER project to promote wheelchair user groups and encourage new ones.

Electrically Powered Wheelchairs

Baroness Darcy de Knayth: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What they regard as a reasonable period of time for a severely disabled person to wait to be provided with an electrically powered indoor/outdoor wheelchair by the National Health Service in England.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The 1999 evaluation of the indoor/outdoor powered wheelchair initiative carried out by the York Health Economics Consortium found that the assessment process takes about 4-5 months on average and that the wheelchairs are generally delivered within 6-8 weeks of the completion of the assessment. The average time between referral and delivery was 24 weeks during 1998-99. It is important for waiting times to be kept to an absolute minimum, given the importance of wheelchairs in promoting the independence of disabled people.

Electrically Powered Wheelchairs

Baroness Darcy de Knayth: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In respect of each health authority in England, how many, and at what cost, electrically powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs and wheelchair vouchers were provided in the financial year 2000-01; and
	In respect of each health authority in England, how many severely disabled people have been assessed as meeting the eligibility criteria for electrically powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs; of these eligible people, how many the National Health Service has so far been unable to provide with such wheelchairs; and what are the maximum and minimum times people have to wait for the provision of such wheelchairs once assessed as eligible.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The available data for 2000-01 on indoor/outdoor powered wheelchairs and vouchers is given in the following table.
	
		
			 HA Name Number of people awaiting or still undergoing assessment Q3 2000-01 Forecast Year End Number of powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs issued to users Q3 2000-01 Forecast Year End Number of powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs issued to users Q3 Q3 Year to date activity Total committed spend in current year on powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs Q3 2000-01 Forecast Year End  £ Total committed spend in current year on powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs Q3 Q3 Year to date activity  £ Number of people issued with a voucher for wheelchair services Q3 2000-01 Forecast Year End Number of people issued with a voucher for wheelchair services Q3 Year to date activity Total actual spend on wheelchair vouchers in the current financial year Q3 2000-01 Forecast Year End  £ Total actual spend on wheelchair vouchers in the current financial year Q3 Year to date activity  £ 
			 England 3,990 3,417 2,508 6,435,002 4,638,971 6,806 5,060 4,343,376 34,016,079 
			 Northern & Yorkshire 737 514 376 796,722 587,327 776 570 458,025 298,625 
			 Trent 526 395 289 750,087 521,284 796 600 483,657 337,338 
			 West Midlands 197 367 288 374,327 278,583 682 510 290,350 184,881 
			 North West 417 360 249 955,446 661,456 1,428 1,064 846,748 631,291 
			 Eastern 288 408 298 734,916 554,793 481 358 283,275 215,792 
			 London 826 354 252 975,304 743,631 534 358 400,993 260,069 
			 South East 575 753 552 1,269,631 900,536 1,537 1,197 931,775 621,266 
			 South West 424 266 204 578,569 391,360 572 403 648,554 466,818 
			 Hillingdon HA 33 5 2 36,000 16,333 40 34 25,000 14,303 
			 Kensington, Chelsea and  Westminster HA 9 11 8 43,650 32,738 3 2 1,216 912 
			 Enfield and Haringey HA 42 26 22 59,786 53,896 24 12 22,000 15,996 
			 Redbridge and Waltham Forest HA 15 56 48 119,100 91,015 39 29 24,500 18,709 
			 Bedfordshire HA 59 68 51 90,000 71,400 82 65 43,510 35,640 
			 Berkshire HA 35 65 52 90,000 67,670 75 58 50,000 36,400 
			 Buckinghamshire HA 52 37 27 106,536 46,422 44 33 88,464 16,682 
			 Bexley and Greenwich HA 6 19 14 116 87 112 66 31 23 
			 Bromley HA 4 12 8 19,000 14,062 49 37 20,000 14,773 
			 Croydon HA 452 36 21 66,000 52,000 44 33 53,000 37,000 
			 East Kent HA 20 71 47 117,620 89,174 94 73 44,878 34,359 
			 West Kent HA 90 80 48 200,000 136,308 100 68 80,000 47,752 
			 Kingston and Richmond HA 11 24 21 40,000 38,152 24 18 47,000 12,337 
			 Lambeth, Southwark and  Lewisham HA 31 36 26 110,000 82,500 4 1 8,840 2,210 
			 Merton, Sutton and Wandsworth  HA 13 42 29 148,837 111,628 58 32 37,395 28,046 
			 East Surrey HA 11 20 16 66,620 48,382 200 145 51,087 23,843 
			 West Surrey HA 25 36 27 96,555 72,416 107 80 78,609 58,957 
			 East Sussex, Brighton and Hove  HA 109 72 54 84,346 63,418 56 42 41,388 31,119 
			 West Sussex HA 39 202 153 90,000 48,095 346 262 118,000 69,112 
			 Barking and Havering HA 52 12 9 46,000 46,000 16 12 61,000 61,000 
			 Barnet HA 6 3 2 30,000 20,551 63 48 26,235 19,678 
			 Brent and Harrow HA 15 7 5 42,564 31,923 12 9 36,308 27,231 
			 Camden and Islington HA 20 20 6 66,633 48,884 14 1 28,000 0 
			 Ealing, Hammersmith and  Hounslow HA 22 26 17 80,000 53,149 
			 East London and City HA 95 19 14 67,618 50,713 32 24 10,468 7,851 
			 North Essex HA 49 60 44 89,100 66,825 
			 South Essex HA 8 36 27 89,300 66,975 17 12 114,000 85,500 
			 South Lancashire HA 5 13 10 36,672 26,218 148 111 72,946 54,709 
			 Liverpool HA 30 27 20 54,503 34,127 47 35 16,520 12,390 
			 Manchester HA 12 20 18 53,000 39,750 16 13 16,070 12,035 
			 Morecambe Bay HA 0 17 17 53,519 53,519 52 44 38,000 29,732 
			 St Helens and Knowsley HA 20 20 14 45,000 33,488 63 53 31,000 27,370 
			 Salford and Trafford HA73,000 54,750   128,000 111,093 
			 Sefton HA 72 12 9 40,000 30,000 16 12 44,000 33,000 
			 Stockport HA 37 20 4 38,605 28,953 40 30 14,551 10,913 
			 West Pennine HA 10 37 22 62,000 35,000 100 78 35,000 23,666 
			 Northamptonshire HA 28 13 10 83,236 62,427 28 21 99,000 74,250 
			 Oxfordshire HA 50 30 23 101,921 86,051 160 144 101,921 90,289 
			 Suffolk HA 25 37 28 87,660 65,745 63 47 23,313 17,484 
			 Barnsley HA 12 23 23 58,767 58,767 8 5 5,660 4,245 
			 North Derbyshire HA 46 35 24 48,000 36,000 124 92 45,000 33,900 
			 South Derbyshire HA 70 68 52 80,000 49,399 112 92 60,000 47,302 
			 Doncaster HA 10 25 19 40 30 70 70 21 21 
			 Leicestershire HA 126 71 51 113,000 35,887 72 11 40,000 6,875 
			 Lincolnshire HA 82 31 18 97,000 64,381 91 78 66,596 54,209 
			 North Nottinghamshire HA 52 21 16 48,000 36,000 29 22 64,000 48,000 
			 Nottingham HA 90 34 29 105,000 103,413 110 94 95,000 69,600 
			 Rotherham HA 4 18 10 40,000 29,690 30 22 9,000 6,271 
			 Sheffield HA 0 40 25 108,000 62,500 30 24 46,100 35,249 
			 Bury and Rochdale HA 59 16 11 48 36 13 11 6 5 
			 North Cheshire HA 8 14 8 212,181 158,769 42 32 16,310 12,232 
			 South Cheshire HA 16 40 30 83,000 27,481 144 105 110,000 36,690 
			 East Lancashire HA 15 22 11 62,459 28,901 149 112 81,365 61,024 
			 North West Lancashire HA 6 20 16 55,795 41,681 389 292 160,000 142,829 
			 North and Mid Hampshire HA 25 35 25 75,738 56,804 96 72 49,181 36,886 
			 Portsmouth and SE Hampshire HA 73 45 34 60,059 45,044 67 50 31,247 23,435 
			 Southampton and SW Hampshire  HA 14 43 34 85,000 67,513 111 106 85,000 65,732 
			 Isle of Wight HA 4 4 2 12,000 10,812 53 43 13,000 12,450 
			 Somerset HA 91 31 25 61,000 44,306 41 32 82,000 63,204 
			 South and West Devon HA 44 35 26 76,671 40,622 25 17 62,668 37,882 
			 Wiltshire HA 18 20 18 72,603 45,861 58 49 94,559 56,475 
			 Avon HA 120 18 9 118,000 88,500 120 58 157,000 117,750 
			 Birmingham HA 20 30 25 160 120 0 0 0 0 
			 Wigan and Bolton HA 94 55 41 49,000 36,750 88 66 65,000 48,750 
			 Wirral HA 33 27 18 45,664 32,033 121 70 17,980 14,853 
			 Bradford HA 65 52 38 82,000 43,965 132 99 46,984 35,238 
			 Durham HA 55 46 34 99,000 73,850 41 31 100,500 74,600 
			 East Riding HA 92 37 26 82,500 61,875 103 77 35,000 21,997 
			 Gateshead and South Tyneside HA 21 48 36 65,688 49,266 4 4 4,473 4,473 
			 Leeds HA 84 52 39 75,345 56,509 153 115 32,192 24,144 
			 Newcastle and North Tyneside HA 22 14 7 60,000 56,000 5 4 2,217 1,663 
			 North Cumbria HA 40 30 18 54,000 32,400 32 20 15,000 9,648 
			 South Humber HA 34 29 22 52,280 45,217 120 90 52,280 31,666 
			 Northumberland HA 20 37 29 44,000 36,000 20 6 60,000 7,440 
			 Sunderland HA 10 20 16 75 29 20 13 8 3 
			 Tees HA 140 55 41 68,200 51,150 15 12 8,300 4,150 
			 Wakefield HA 26 21 16 42,000 33,281 21 16 16,000 12,077 
			 North Yorkshire HA 128 66 49 77,267 58,017 166 125 113,316 85,166 
			 Calderdale and Kirklees HA 34 36 27 46,647 34,985 64 48 24,035 18,026 
			 Cornwall and Isles of Scilly HA 15 25 18 25,168 20,199 28 22 40,000 31,458 
			 Dorset HA 77 85 64 116,132 87,099 76 57 83,327 62,495 
			 North and East Devon HA 40 23 22 58,995 44,253 26 26 77,000 66,944 
			 Gloucestershire HA 19 29 22 50,000 20,520 198 142 52,000 30,610 
			 Coventry HA 3 13 10 51,116 38,337 10 8 20,704 15,528 
			 Dudley HA 10 16 10 42,000 20,036 70 52 26,000 21,385 
			 Herefordshire HA 4 10 1 12,000 1,600 20 18 10,000 8,895 
			 Sandwell HA 5 37 28 49,483 37,112 11 8 5,724 4,293 
			 Shropshire HA 14 19 14 57,000 43,022 71 51 69,000 20,162 
			 Solihull HA 2 28 22 19,000 18,971 18 13 10,000 6,555 
			 North Staffordshire HA 3 28 22 49,500 38,022 27 21 13,075 9,806 
			 South Staffordshire HA 83 35 35 61,530 56,957 80 54 36,000 23,375 
			 Walsall HA 19 35 23 79 62 30 26 20 12 
			 Warwickshire HA 20 46 36 0 0 170 128 81,000 60,750 
			 Wolverhampton HA 4 23 17 32,459 24,344 24 18 18,735 14,051 
			 Worcestershire HA 10 47 45 0 0 151 113 92 69 
			 E and N Hertfordshire HA 49 43 32 56,000 42,000 46 35 9,397 7,048 
			 West Hertfordshire HA 4 35 26 92,181 69,136 24 20 22,293 16,720 
			 Cambridgeshire HA 40 50 38 105,000 78,456 190 140 50,000 37,829 
			 Norfolk HA 54 79 52 125,675 94,256 59 39 20,762 15,570 
		
	
	Footnote: the data is sourced from common information core quarterly monitoring returns, collected at health authority level.
	Further data is available on number of people choosing the partnership option for vouchers and number choosing the independent option.